Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

The Straight Story

(48,121 posts)
Thu Dec 22, 2011, 08:29 PM Dec 2011

Retiring Calif. officers want to keep assault guns

Retiring Calif. officers want to keep assault guns

SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- A statewide lobbying group for police officers said Thursday it will pursue legislation next year that would allow officers to keep assault weapons after they retire, seeking to overturn an opinion issued last year by the state attorney general's office.

Peace officers can own assault weapons that are illegal for civilians to buy, even for officers' off-duty use. The Associated Press reported Wednesday that more than 7,600 officers have bought such firearms since the state began allowing the practice a decade ago. The weapons must be registered with the state Department of Justice.


Officers who buy assault weapons must give them up when they retire or leave law enforcement because they no longer qualify as peace officers under California law, then-Attorney General Jerry Brown said in an official opinion issued last December.

Brown based the decision on several court rulings, state law and lawmakers' intent when they exempted law enforcement from the state's assault weapons ban in 2001. He issued the ruling days before he was sworn in as governor.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/12/22/4140836/retiring-calif-officers-want-to.html#storylink=cpy

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Retiring Calif. officers want to keep assault guns (Original Post) The Straight Story Dec 2011 OP
I believe they could reconfigure the weapons to non-AW configuration and keep them slackmaster Dec 2011 #1
Hacksaw the bayonet lug off and give 'em a 10-round magazine. BiggJawn Dec 2011 #2
I suspect we're talking full-auto. Straw Man Dec 2011 #6
Well, it *IS* Collie-For-Nya... BiggJawn Dec 2011 #7
Nope, it's semi auto one-eyed fat man Dec 2011 #8
Too bad. krispos42 Dec 2011 #3
Rules are for thee, not me. X_Digger Dec 2011 #4
Fuck 'em and the horses... er, Crown Vics... they rode in on. PavePusher Dec 2011 #5
 

slackmaster

(60,567 posts)
1. I believe they could reconfigure the weapons to non-AW configuration and keep them
Thu Dec 22, 2011, 08:37 PM
Dec 2011

It's not hard to do with popular rifles such as AR-15 variants.

BiggJawn

(23,051 posts)
2. Hacksaw the bayonet lug off and give 'em a 10-round magazine.
Thu Dec 22, 2011, 09:04 PM
Dec 2011

That ought to fix it, right?
Or are we talking full-auto machine guns here.

one-eyed fat man

(3,201 posts)
8. Nope, it's semi auto
Fri Dec 23, 2011, 11:37 AM
Dec 2011

For those with short memories, a similar provision was part of the expired Federal Assault Weapons Ban. Magazines and firearms that were banned from civilian ownership were to be marked "For Law Enforcement or Export Use Only" or similar, as pictured.





The relevant sections of the Bill passed by Congress are excerpted below.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c103:1:./temp/~c103CNdkHf:e644150:

SEC. 110102. RESTRICTION ON MANUFACTURE, TRANSFER, AND POSSESSION OF CERTAIN SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS.

(a) RESTRICTION- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

`(v)(1) It shall be unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon.

<snip>

`(4) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--

<snip>

`(C) the possession, by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving a firearm, of a semiautomatic assault weapon transferred to the individual by the agency upon such retirement.

SEC. 110103. BAN OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES.

(a) PROHIBITION- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, as amended by section 110102(a), is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

`(w)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for a person to transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.

`(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully possessed on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection.

`(3) This subsection shall not apply to--

<snip>

`(C) the possession, by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving ammunition, of a large capacity ammunition feeding device transferred to the individual by the agency upon such retirement


The Federal law clearly established that retired law enforcement officers were super citizens, given powers far beyond those of mortal men. They had always been able under Federal law to keep assault weapons and large capacity magazines for their personal use after retirement.

krispos42

(49,445 posts)
3. Too bad.
Thu Dec 22, 2011, 09:21 PM
Dec 2011

How long does the "special training" and "moral and ethical standards" that LEOs use to justifying privileges that regular folks don't get last after they retire?

I'd give them 6 months, then whatever superior training skills and/or ethical and moral standards they are alleged to have are pretty much gone, and they're just regular Californians, who are subject to the same over-regulation, bad regulation, and anti-gun policies that the Legislature chooses to inflict upon regular Californians.

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)
4. Rules are for thee, not me.
Thu Dec 22, 2011, 09:22 PM
Dec 2011

Is anyone honestly surprised that the police want the rules to apply to others instead of themselves?

 

PavePusher

(15,374 posts)
5. Fuck 'em and the horses... er, Crown Vics... they rode in on.
Thu Dec 22, 2011, 10:04 PM
Dec 2011

Hasn't their union and their political associations been supportive of the restrictions placed on the Citizens?

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Retiring Calif. officers ...